And twice the risk of having a failure with two servers for that instead of one.
Remote here makes no sense. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ryan Sent: Mittwoch, 12. März 2014 15:50 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [mssms] Moving SCCM 2012 DB >From what I've heard, it is more secure to keep the SQL DB local. http://gerryhampsoncm.blogspot.com/2013/10/configmgr-sql-some-tips.html http://sirsql.net/blog/2012/12/27/sccm-sql-server-a-dbas-worst-nightmare On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 9:34 AM, Brian McDonald <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: Hi everyone, My DBA has asked me to move my local SQL install remote. I have a single primary site with 64 GB of memory and service only 1200 clients total. I see no reason to move the SQL to a remote location. They basically told me there reasoning was from a security standpoint. First reason was because local install required a local SQL instance (licensing), which we explained to them we are using STD edition and licensing is included. I need a strong business case to keep my SQL install local. I see no reason to move it off-box. Any suggestions? Thanks, Brian
